Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.

By filing instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought following relief :

"(i) the entire enquiry proceedings conducted on the basis of charge-sheet dated 6.9.2001, enquiry report dated 26.10.2002, suspension order dated 7.9.2007, punishment order dated 24.6.2011 and the appellate order dated 19.10.2011 be quashed and set aside with all consequential benefits to the petitioner;

(ii) during the pendency of writ petition if the petitioner attains the superannuation then also release all retiral benefits;

(iii) any other order or direction as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of humble petitioner.

(iv) cost of this writ petition may also be awarded in favour of humble petitioner."

Brief facts of the case as has been mentioned by the petitioner in the petition filed by him are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Amin. After appointment he worked as Amin at various places from time to time in the Settlement Department and for some period he was also on deputation with the Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur. He was also granted selection scale on completion of 9 and 18 years of service but due to the charge-sheet issued to the petitioner and the departmental proceedings conducted thereupon, the petitioner was denied the benefit of selection scale on completion of 27 years of service.

The petitioner was served with a charge sheet vide memorandum dated 06.09.2001 under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules 1958 ("Rules of 1958" for short hereinafter) wherein following charges (four in numbers) were levelled against him :

(i) The first allegation levelled against the petitioner is that while the petitioner was posted as Amin under the Assistant Settlement Officer, Sanganer he had committed irregularity for village Bhankrota, Tehsil Sanganer, wherein present Khasra No. 1461 was mentioned in the name of Mangi Lal and Babu Lal - both sons of Shri Gulla Ram, by caste Kumawat after striking of the name of Smt. Chandrarai Surana wife of Shri P.C. Rai Surana R.O. Hugali West Bengal, khatedar of earlier khasra No. 682 and in the Khasra document column 8 where it was mentioned as 682 which was over-written as 708 and in column No. 25 a note was mentioned by the petitioner that it was as per the orders passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer in 'B' file dated 3.7.1987. The allegation was that such order was not available in 'B' file.

(ii) The second allegation against the petitioner was that for present Khasra No. 1574 the name of Gullaram son of Gangaram Kumawat was shown as gair-khatedar in column No. 23. The same was strike-off and it was entered as Sawai Chak and in Khasra Book column No. 25, a note was mentioned that it was in accordance with the order passed in 'B' file dated 22.06.1987, although there is no such order available in the B file.

(iii) The third charge levelled against the petitioner was that for Khasra No. 1492/2680 measuring 0.28 hectare in village Bhankrota, the entry Sawai Chak was striked-off and Mangilal etc. were entered and in column no. 25 note was mentioned to see Khasra No. 1461.

(iv) The fourth charge levelled against the petitioner was that before making such entries he should have got the enquiry conducted by the Inspector but in order to escape from any such conspiracy being opened, the enquiry was not conducted from the Inspector with the purpose to get gainful benefit and to provide unlawful benefit to Mangilal and Babulal both sons of Gullaram. Such corrections and deletions were made on the basis of mentioning fraudulent orders.

Upon receiving the aforesaid memorandum, the petitioner submitted a preliminary reply with a request that the charge-sheet be dropped after giving him a personal hearing. He pointed out that the action taken by the petitioner was on the basis of orders issued by the Assista